United States & Gun Control discussion.

[Rapid]

But therein lies the trap. They'll say, "yes, your right, and your own statistics show that that the only way to prevent this type of gun crime is to ban all private gun ownership, which is where they ultimately want to take it. So don't fall for it; instead of showing statistics that show only different types of gun crimes, which will only lead even a reasonable person to conclude that "all guns are bad," we need to frame the discussion by showing 1) how guns help prevent crime and 2) what weapons, accidents, and medical conditions kill more people every year than guns, and 3) (probably should be #1) explain why the individual right to keep and bear arms is so important both now and in the long term.

We need to get away from discussions about certain features of weapons, and why some guns are not as bad as others, and concentrate on the reasons people need to have guns, and are allowed to have guns in the first place.

I did foresee that, but that's where you can point to the 2nd amendment. The anti-gun movement know they can only work on this by gradually chipping away at gun rights, and that they don't have a chance of abolishing the 2nd A. in one blow. They target assault rifles to begin with -- and that's where you can use the statistics to show them, 'no, you can't do that because it doesn't make any sense'.

The only thing they could retort is that guns should be banned altogether, but again, that can't/won't happen (not in one feel swoop anyway). Neither would it stop most gun crime, since there are already too many guns in circulation. At the very best, it would just put a dent in 'spur of the moment' killings. That's hardly worth it for the downsides: innocent people not being able to defend themselves, thus an increase in other types of crimes.

You have to be careful with how you present statistics, but I'm fairly confident there's always a way to make them work for you if you avoid the pitfalls.

 

[Marine0311]

 

[policemedic]

That young Corporal represented the issue, himself, and the United States Marine Corps very well.

 

[Rapid]

Agreed -- and more people need to do so. It's also an example of a situation where it can help to know the facts behind these gun crimes. The ditzy news anchor used two recent shootings involving rifles as an argument for "CHANGE!" against assault rifles, yet she's completely oblivious to the wider history of these types of shootings. I think she would've been flustered if he would've pointed out that assault rifles are actually a minority problem in these shootings (on top of his argument that this shit just happens and more people should be armed).

Good on him for standing up and speaking out. Like I said, the more people doing so the better. Did you see that shit-eating grin where she just sniggers and dismisses what he says about the Constitution at the end? I'm sure it took a lot of restraint to not just flat-out call her a dumbass.

 

[Chopstick]

I like how she just brushed off the David Gregory comment. She didnt want to go there LOL. Dumb ass.

 

[CDG]

Apparently the Bank of America seems to feel that it can freeze accounts based on personal opinions. Not sure if this is true or not, but if it is, then I hope BoA gets hammered by a judge.

"Bank of America has reportedly frozen the account of gun manufacturer American Spirit Arms, according to its owner, Joe Sirochman.
In a Facebook post dated December 29, Sirochman wrote the following:
“My name is Joe Sirochman owner of American Spirit Arms...our Web site orders have jumped 500 percent causing our Web site e-commerce processing larger deposits to Bank of America. So they decided to hold the deposits for further review.
“After countless hours on the phone with Bank of America, I finally got a manager in the right department that told me the reason that the deposits were on hold for further review -- her exact words were -- ‘We believe you should not be selling guns and parts on the Internet.’”(emphasis added)"

http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwy...un-manufacturers-account-company-owner-claims

 

[pardus]

Bank of America are very anti gun, they can go fuck themselves, they'll never see a dime of my money.

http://www.examiner.com/article/att...k-of-america-closes-account-with-manufacturer

 

[Yoshi]

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/alex-jones-piers-morgan-video-140201992.html

Alex Jones gives a few good points in between his ranting and raving about New World Order. Piers seemed to be a little hurt when told he fled from the UK . I wish this guy would go back to his crappy television shows and stay out of the media.

 

[Marine0311]

A certain state may be proposing that all guns owners date be made public. I'll go find a source. Stand by.

 

[Chopstick]

When are they going to post the personal info of people on antidepressants and people who have STDs? I say lets go for broke on this. Everyone in the pool!

 

[AWP]

When are they going to post the personal info of people on antidepressants and people who have STDs? I say lets go for broke on this. Everyone in the pool!

A public list of gun owners, those on anti-depressants, and those with STD's?

http://www.shadowspear.com/vb/members/

 

[talonlm]

What? No map?

 

[Ranger Psych]

there you go

 

[AWP]

High five, Ranger. MS Paint FTW.

 

[Marine0311]

http://www.salon.com/2012/12/18/7_craziest_gun_laws_in_america/

1. Five states allow students to carry concealed guns on college campuses
A March 2012 Colorado Supreme Court decision held that the University of Colorado could not ban students and employees with state-issued concealed weapon permits from carrying guns on campus. The decision overturned the university’s long-standing gun ban. While school policy prohibits guns at ticketed athletic and cultural events, Boulder and Colorado Springs’ campuses now designate dorms for permit-carrying students. (Guns are still banned in other dorms). “Not a single student has asked to live where guns are allowed,” the Denver Post reported last month.
In September 2011, the Oregon Court of Appeals issued a similar ruling, allowing guns on campuses throughout the Oregon University system.
Wisconsin passed legislation in 2011 allowing college students in the University of Wisconsin school system to bring a concealed weapon on campus grounds, parking lots and “other spaces that aren’t enclosed,” according to the Wisconsin State Journal. The school can prohibit guns in buildings, but only if signs are posted at each entrance.
A law passed by the Mississippi State Legislature in 2011 broadly extended the places where concealed weapons are allowed, including college campuses, secondary schools, courthouses, polling locations, churches, bars and passenger terminals of an airport – places previously off-limits. This year, the University of Mississippi, which previously required students to leave guns in their vehicles, began allowing students to bring concealed weapons on campus, provided they have a concealed weapons permit and take an 8-hour training course.
Utah grants the least discretion: Since 2004, the state has prohibited any public college or university from banning concealed weapons, as campuses are considered state property.

 

[Ranger Psych]

 

[8654Maine]

youtube video

That was awesome.

 

[Th3 Maelstr0m]

1. Five states allow students to carry concealed guns on college campuses

This is a perfect example of the media cherry-picking information. I guarantee they looked up info on the escalation of gun violence relating to these kind of laws. The problem? There hasn't been any escalation in gun violence:

Since the fall semester of 2006, state law has allowed licensed individuals to carry concealed handguns on the campuses of the nine degree-offering public colleges (20 campuses) and one public technical college (10 campuses) in Utah. Concealed carry has been allowed at Colorado State University (Fort Collins, CO) since 2003 and at Blue Ridge Community College (Weyers Cave, VA) since 1995. After allowing concealed carry on campus for a combined total of one hundred semesters, none of these twelve schools has seen a single resulting incident of gun violence (including threats and suicides), a single gun accident, or a single gun theft. Likewise, none of the forty ‘right-to-carry’ states has seen a resulting increase in gun violence since legalizing concealed carry, despite the fact that licensed citizens in those states regularly carry concealed handguns in places like office buildings, movie theaters, grocery stores, shopping malls, restaurants, churches, banks, etc. Numerous studies, including studies by University of Maryland senior research scientist John Lott, University of Georgia professor David Mustard, engineering statistician William Sturdevant, and various state agencies, show that concealed handgun license holders are five times less likely than non-license holders to commit violent crimes.​

http://concealedcampus.org/common-arguments/#1​

​

So what they probably did is see that nothing has happened in these schools, refused to acknowledge that, & instead say “Not a single student has asked to live where guns are allowed.”

It would be so refreshing to have a debate on this topic if the other side argued from something other than emotion. I'm sure there are some of them out there, but I haven't come across them yet. My first semester of college I had a debate on the topic of concealed carry on campus & not a single one of the arguments put against my position had any grounding in logic.

It's sad, because while I am strongly pro-2nd Amendment, there are some arguments that could be brought against our position worth debating. I still think we have the high ground at the end of the day, but it would be refreshing to have an informed debate on the topic. Ideally, that debate should happen BEFORE legislation is under way to infringe on our rights.

 

[Chopstick]

So I signed one of the petitions on that "We The People" website. The petition was "When Discussing the Second Amendment, Keep the First in Mind Too".
Look what I got in my email today. So nice of Jay Carney to get back to me.

By Jay Carney, White House Press Secretary
Thank you for participating in We the People to speak out on an issue that matters to you.
Let’s not let arguments over the Constitution’s Second Amendment violate the spirit of its First. President Obama believes that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. However, the Constitution not only guarantees an individual right to bear arms, but also enshrines the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press -- fundamental principles that are essential to our democracy. Americans may disagree on matters of public policy and express those disagreements vigorously, but no one should be punished by the government simply because he or she expressed a view on the Second Amendment -- or any other matter of public concern.
We recognize that the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut, sparked an intense, and at times emotional, national conversation about the steps we can take as a country to reduce gun violence. In fact, your petition is one of many on the issue, and President Obama personally responded by sharing his views on this important issue.
In a recent press conference, President Obama also addressed the Second Amendment and the important perspective that law-abiding gun owners bring to the public conversation on this issue:

Look, like the majority of Americans, I believe that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. This country has a strong tradition of gun ownership that's been handed down from generation to generation. Obviously across the country there are regional differences. There are differences between how people feel in urban areas and rural areas. And the fact is the vast majority of gun owners in America are responsible -- they buy their guns legally and they use them safely, whether for hunting or sport shooting, collection or protection.
But you know what, I am also betting that the majority -- the vast majority -- of responsible, law-abiding gun owners would be some of the first to say that we should be able to keep an irresponsible, law-breaking few from buying a weapon of war. I'm willing to bet that they don't think that using a gun and using common sense are incompatible ideas -- that an unbalanced man shouldn't be able to get his hands on a military-style assault rifle so easily; that in this age of technology, we should be able to check someone's criminal records before he or she can check out at a gun show; that if we work harder to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people, there would be fewer atrocities like the one in Newtown -- or any of the lesser-known tragedies that visit small towns and big cities all across America every day.​

Tell us what you think about this response and We the People.

 

[Marine0311]

http://www.seattlepi.com/news/us/article/NY-s-Cuomo-proposes-gun-ammo-clip-restrictions-4178048.php

ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo is proposing to close loopholes on a state ban on assault weapons and ammunition clips that carry more than 10 bullets in this third State of the State speech.
According to information provided before the speech, Cuomo's gun proposal would also require follow-ups for owners of handgun licenses to make sure they are still qualified to possess a gun based on criminal and other records.